Power Board's Tariff

Manawatu Times, Volume 62, Issue 33, 9 February 1937, Page 4

Power Board's Tariff

No Further Reductions Before Financial Year POSITION SMALL CONSUMER. Present at yesterday’s meeting of the Manawatu-Oroua Power Board were Messrs C. G. C. Dermer (chairman), M. A. Eliott, J. Hodgcns M.P., W. McKay, J. H. Mason, P. G. Guy, W. PBickers, J. Boyce, N. Campbell, W. G. Shannon, E. O. Bond and J. A. Nash. The Manawatu Reliance Co-op Dairy Coy directors wrote complaining of the number of interruptions in the supply in the Rangiotu area which caused considerable inconvenience to suppliers. The directors wanted to know why their aroa seemed to have more interruptions than any other. The engineer (Mr W. A. Waters) said broken lines and torn binders had been responsible and somo of these troubles took quite a time to locate. Three cars had been out trying to locate the trouble. Mr Boyce thought it was a wonder more interruptions had not taken place with the gales that had been experienced. Tariff Charges. Mr C. Rogers (Halcombe) wrote complaining of the present tariff, making a comparison of the Board’s charges with those of Wellington. Mr Nash thought the writer unfair in making a comparison with Wellington which was a closely populated area. Mr. Bickers: Wo are conducting our affairs as well as any Board in New Zealand. Mr Nash: Wo have 600 miles of lines in the district and in spite of that big capital outlay, wo have reduced the price from 8d and 9d to what it is at present. The chairman: This man doesn’t know what he is writing about. We are not the highest tariffed board in the district. The comparison •with Wellington is unfair. Mr Rogers is to be advised that the tariff is to be revised again at the end of the financial year. The executive committee also recommended to tho Board that the question of the tariff be held over until tho end of the financial year, and that tho committee meet in April and report fo a special meeting of the Board to be held in April, and that any reductions then made be for all consumption after the April readings. The chairman, speaking on the question of the tariff, pointed out that some of the consumers were paying more out the reason was that they had been paying at too low a rate previously. Those now finding their accounts reduced had been paying too much before. Mr Dermer added that the Board had now got down to a basis and it seemed they woul4 ftc in a reasonable position at the end of tho financial year to make further fairly reasonable reductions. At the end of the financial year the Board would know what its credit balance was. Even if the reductions wero made immediately, they couldn’t be made effective before April 1. Mr Guy directed attention to the secretary’s report (printed below) revealing uncreased revenue in spite of the fact that tho Board was sup” sed to have given away its profits in tariff reductions; There was a whole army of users who had had to pay bigger electric accounts and users who could least afford it. To have to pay from 4s to 5s more each month was a lot. Why couldn’t there be reductions before the end of tho financial year? asked Mr Guy. Other Boards have reduced prices during the year when discovering they wero making more profits than necessary to run their affairs. Mr Guy moved as an amendment to the committee’s recommendation; “that the first ‘step’ for which 6d per unit is charged, be reduced from 15 units to 12 units.” Mr Eliott mentioned that the Board’s expenditure had gone up as well as tho revenue. Mr. Bond said the executive had gone into the question much more fully than Mr Guy and he could assure the latter that the executive had every sympathy with the small consumer but the executive wanted to know where it stood at the cud of the year before making any recommendations for reductions. Tho motive Was to play safe. The executive had not lost sight of the small consumMr Mason agreed with Mr Bond in his last statement. Mr McKay said he also did not hold that the big consumer should get big reductions. Tho Board had to be fair and consider all consumers. Mr McKay said he was in favour of first consideration being given to the first step. The secretary explained how difficult it was to gauge the units that would be used especially with split-coil metres. The executive had desired a six-months reading to get a better idea of what was being used. He quoted the following figures to show the seasonal variation in the amount of electric used in the Board’s area:— First six months (winter) 1935-36, 422,165 units; second six months (summer) 1935-36, 296,440 units. Mr Guy: Is it fair to the consumer to have these profits in hand? The amendment was defeated. Financial Statement The secretary supplied the following financial statement: — Sales of current: Total sales for 9 months, 1936-37, £65,743 11a 4d; 393536, £61,989 17s 7d; increase, £3753 13s 9d. Purchase of current: Purchases for 9 months, 1936-37, £29,855; 1935-36, £27,360; increase, £2495. Revenue and expenditure; Total revenue for 9 months, 1936-37, £66,228 17s lOd; 1935-36, £62,412 13s lid; increase, £3816 3s lid. Total expenditure for 9 months, 1936-37, £65,105 14s; 1935-36, £60,804 6s; increase, £4301 Bs. “The surplus for the period amounts

to £1123 2s lOd compared with £I6OB 7s lid for the same period last year. The last three months of tho year aro always the best revenuo producing periods, and I estimate that wo should finish up the year with a credit balance of between. £3500 and £4000,” added tho secretary. The revenue for tho nine months under the various headings is as follows: — L. heating and cooking: 1935-36, £27310 13s 2d; 1936-37, £29,018 3s 9d; increase, £1707 10s 7d. Milking motors: £7096 Ss lid; 193637, £7085 13s 9d; increase, Dec. £lO 15s 2d. Industrial motors: £3851 12s 6d; 1936-37, £4224 3s 7d; increase £372 .11s Id. Freezing works: £4087 4s 8d; 193637, £4495 35.; increase, £407. 18s 4d. Water heating: 1935-36, £5820 11s lOd; J93G-37, £6049 15s; increase, £229 3s 2d.. Street and community lighting: £716 Cs 7d; 1936-37, £719 19s Gd; increase, £3 12s lid. Bulk power: 1935-36, £13,106 19s lid; £14,150 12s 9d; increase, £1043 12s lOd. Totals: 1935-36, £61,989 17s 7d; 1936-37, £65,743 lls 4d; increase, £3753 13s 9d. % The State Advances Corporation wrote agreeing to lend the board £SOOO for 15 years at 3J per cent., repayable on an amortisation table of 20 years. The Treasury has approved of the loan. Negotiations with City Council. The executive submitted for adoption, the following recommendation regarding the dispute with tho Palmerston North City Council: ‘‘That tho. Palmerston North City Council and the Public Works Department be written to informing them that the board would appreciate a settlement of the dispute between them regarding power supply, before April 1 next, as the board wishes to review the tariff for the coming year.” The chairman said there was no desire to interfere with the negotiations between the City Council and Minister, but it would be of considerable advantage to the board if the dispute could be settled. Mr. Guy thought a deputation should wait on tho Minister but the board did not favour tho suggestion. <